Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 Skipping the talent part, you're much more likely to see passion on any given night in the AHL. Especially during the regular season. Not to mention the fact that it's about one/fifth the cost. 231514[/snapback] Couldnt agree more.
rolly Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Skipping the talent part, you're much more likely to see passion on any given night in the AHL. Especially during the regular season. Not to mention the fact that it's about one/fifth the cost. 231514[/snapback] See, I disagree. I've been to AHL and NHL games and I don't think there is much difference in overall effort from the players. AHL teams are half-washed up players from the NHL and half young, NHL hopefuls. Now if it were all NHL hopefuls. I think we'd see a college basketball/NBA type deal. I would much rather watch the sabres and pay 10-15 more dollars doing it because they are some of the best hockey players in the world.
rolly Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Unfortunately Nobody cares 228671[/snapback] If no one cares, why are there 81 replies to this thread, and over 1,00 views?
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 If no one cares, why are there 81 replies to this thread, and over 1,00 views? 231537[/snapback] Thats just E$PN propaganda and dont forget that ESPN is part of the reason for the decline interest in the NHL....if NHL players had more "goal dances" or cut albums, maybe E$PN would pay more attention.
rolly Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Thats just E$PN propaganda and dont forget that ESPN is part of the reason for the decline interest in the NHL....if NHL players had more "goal dances" or cut albums, maybe E$PN would pay more attention. 231539[/snapback] Good point, ESPN is a perfect example of our society as a whole today: shallow and materialistic.
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 See, I disagree. I've been to AHL and NHL games and I don't think there is much difference in overall effort from the players. AHL teams are half-washed up players from the NHL and half young, NHL hopefuls. Now if it were all NHL hopefuls. I think we'd see a college basketball/NBA type deal. I would much rather watch the sabres and pay 10-15 more dollars doing it because they are some of the best hockey players in the world. 231533[/snapback] Everybody sees things differently. That's what makes the world interesting. I can sit in the best seat in the house in Rochester for a face value price of $19. I paid about 5 times that the last time I was in Colorado - and those were average seats. Ridiculous.
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 See, I disagree. I've been to AHL and NHL games and I don't think there is much difference in overall effort from the players. AHL teams are half-washed up players from the NHL and half young, NHL hopefuls. Now if it were all NHL hopefuls. I think we'd see a college basketball/NBA type deal. I would much rather watch the sabres and pay 10-15 more dollars doing it because they are some of the best hockey players in the world. 231533[/snapback] But even if college football for example, how many of those kids are going pro anyway? Even if 1/2 of the prospects in an AHL game have a good chance to go to the pros, thats still a good percentage.
SouthernMan Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Go to Ontario and say that. Just because it isnt huge south of the Mason Dixon line, doesn't mean people don't care... 228657[/snapback] Well, that's the whole point, isn't it?!?!? If the popularity of the sport isn't comnensurate with the demands of the players, there's a bit of a problem. The owners are in the driver seat on this issue, and the NHLPA is either too stupid or too stubborn to realize they don't have the leverage. It's not like when baseball or the NFL players went on strike. The owners in those leagues WERE losing out. For most NHL owners, they're actually ahead financially without the costs of maintaining an endeavor that keeps them in the red. What are the players going to do, join a new league. If one were to start up, I can't imagine the players could come close to being paid what they're now asking. The bottom line is this: as great as people from the great white north and northeast may think hockey is, it's still never going to have the mainstream attention that the other sports get. The other sports attract minority players and fans, and almost any kid can in the USA can become aquainted with the sport by growing up playing a sandlot version of these roundball, baseball, or football. Hockey has the huge disadvantage of needing an ice rink - something 90% of the country doesn't have easy access to. The climatic and financial restrictions will always prevent minorities from setting their hooks into the game. So right from the get go, the vast majority of fans are cultivated in middle to upper class northern households. Do the math. It ain't gonna happen. I think the NHL might do themselves good (if they ever start up again) by making tickets real affordable. The way things are now, they try to make up for TV revenue at the gate. All they accomplish with this is alienating the very fan base they should be recruiting. They should sell seats for $10-$12 each and get fathers taking their kids and their kids friends to games. It wouldn't be long before they'd get a better TV audience from the fans who've had the "live" experience. It's hard for anyone who's never seen a game in person to have a great appreciation when all they've ever seen is some lame TV broadcast. Right now, I don't care if the NHL goes away forever. Let the toothless spoiled brat players get a real job with 2 weeks vacation a year, and see how long it is before they come crawling back on their hands and knees begging to play for $100,000. Maybe then the owners could make some money.
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 Well, that's the whole point, isn't it?!?!? If the popularity of the sport isn't comnensurate with the demands of the players, there's a bit of a problem. The owners are in the driver seat on this issue, and the NHLPA is either too stupid or too stubborn to realize they don't have the leverage. It's not like when baseball or the NFL players went on strike. The owners in those leagues WERE losing out. For most NHL owners, they're actually ahead financially without the costs of maintaining an endeavor that keeps them in the red. What are the players going to do, join a new league. If one were to start up, I can't imagine the players could come close to being paid what they're now asking. The bottom line is this: as great as people from the great white north and northeast may think hockey is, it's still never going to have the mainstream attention that the other sports get. The other sports attract minority players and fans, and almost any kid can in the USA can become aquainted with the sport by growing up playing a sandlot version of these roundball, baseball, or football. Hockey has the huge disadvantage of needing an ice rink - something 90% of the country doesn't have easy access to. The climatic and financial restrictions will always prevent minorities from setting their hooks into the game. So right from the get go, the vast majority of fans are cultivated in middle to upper class northern households. Do the math. It ain't gonna happen. I think the NHL might do themselves good (if they ever start up again) by making tickets real affordable. The way things are now, they try to make up for TV revenue at the gate. All they accomplish with this is alienating the very fan base they should be recruiting. They should sell seats for $10-$12 each and get fathers taking their kids and their kids friends to games. It wouldn't be long before they'd get a better TV audience from the fans who've had the "live" experience. It's hard for anyone who's never seen a game in person to have a great appreciation when all they've ever seen is some lame TV broadcast. Right now, I don't care if the NHL goes away forever. Let the toothless spoiled brat players get a real job with 2 weeks vacation a year, and see how long it is before they come crawling back on their hands and knees begging to play for $100,000. Maybe then the owners could make some money. 231586[/snapback] Excellent post and I agree with many of your points, especially about having "easy access" to play the other sports, its just not that easy with hockey, and even in some places if you want to rent a rink to play hockey, youll have to play at oddball times (1am, 2am etc)...its not easy. The players do have to face the harsh reality that the NHL is not bringing in the revenue it once was, especially without TV money, but I do believe the owners should give just a tad more felxibility as well. But some of the problems with the NHL today does fall squarely on the owners, but still ownes cannot get together and decide to hold down salaries, thats collusion, so its clear the system is flawed. IMO Bettman has done a pretty bad job overall, and needs to be replaced, especially if the season is cancelled. Same with Goodenow. The NHL MUST find a good system for all parties, get rules changed for the better, AND lower ticket prices to get back the good hockey fans.
Typical TBD Guy Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 I hope the NHL folds and they start a new league, one that adopts the European hockey model (their rules and regulations, etc.). There'd be a salary cap and two conferences in this new league. 8 teams would be in each conference, 2 divisions per conference. The first conf. would be all Canadian teams, the second one all northern US teams. And of course, I hope Golisano takes the Sabres out of the NHL and into this new league. Hey, I can dream... in reality, it will never happen and hockey in North America will continue to go down the toilet.
mphs mike Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Guy Trottier...one of my favorites in the year or two prior to the Sabres coming to town. 228655[/snapback] I remember as a young kid being VERY disappointed that the Sabres wouldn't have Trottier playing for them - I couldn't understand, as an 8 year old, how this "better" team couldn't have Buffalo's star hockey player! Those were the days- I still wear an "old time hockey" Est. 1928 with the Pepsi cap shirt!
Ramius Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 College hockey my friends...now thats where the real hockey is played...those kids just want to win... Go Clarkson!!!! Lets go Tech!!!!
CentralVaBills Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 The Panthers? I don't think so, and here's why... Their ticket sales have to be through the roof. Last season, when we were the two worst teams in the entire league, my friends and I went to a Panthers and Sabres game. We figured we would just buy tickets at the ticket booth.. wrong! Completely sold out, and they then sold out the "standing room" tickets. So, we bought 5 tickets off of a scalper at $30 a piece for the LAST row in the areana. Anyway, we get in, and the place is PACKED. The Sabres scored, and about 500 max cheered. The rest were legitimate Panthers fans, or so one thought. Well, when they scored, about 1000 of them cheered, the rest sat in their seats. You see, in south florida, hockey games are just like the bars/clubs. People do not go to have a good time, let loose, have some cocktails, etc... they go to be seen. It's !@#$ pathetic and sad... Anyway, I've been to two panthers games and both were sold out and packed to the gills... If ticket sales mean anything, I think the panthers would survive. 228676[/snapback] Actually, the Panthers only sold out 4 games last year. Toronto, Tampa Bay, New York Rangers and Washington. The Buffalo games......well......only one game did well, the other was pathetic. 11/24/03 vs the Sabres, the Panthers drew 12,927 and the other on 3/20/04 they drew 18,504. Both non-sellouts. NHL counts tickets sold, not fannies in the seats. The actual fans in the stands were probably much worse, especially for the first one. As a matter of fact, the Panthers had crowds of under 13,500 11 times last year, which is pretty bad! This happened all over the league though. The game is OK in hotbeds, but is struggling badly elsewhere. If the NHL contracted, the Panthers are in serious trouble!
Bob4Bills Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 you can really tell the people who are from Buffalo and those that are not when you open a NHL thread... those that don't care can't POSSIBLY be from Buffalo. I mean, if you've ever been to a Sabres/Leafs game and don't care about the possible demise of hockey, then you just never understood what an amazing game it is.. 228642[/snapback] You couldn't be more wrong, Steve. I've loved the NHL since I was old enough to tie double runners on my boots and was regularly in the Keenan Center at 3:00a.m. for ice time when it was THE ONLY rink in WNY. I immediately became a lifetime fanatic when the Sabres were born in '70. Been to countless Sabre games and know very well the 'Trono' REGIONAL rivalry. Hockey Night in Canada was a blessing to WNY'ers prior to cable tv. Though I reside in Fla now (where the Cup continues to reside..), nothing has changed EXCEPT the reality that the NHL -as a business entity- is horribly bush league!! Ever finacially troubled, the league 'braintrust', revamped their playoff system to virtually render an 80 game regular season meaningless as only half the teams would be eliminated. When that concept failed to generate enough revenue, they expanded all over southern North America. 'They' didn't bother to take note of the fact that one/eighth of their playing surface is unseen from tv camera's. 'They' didn't walk in the knowedge that speed doesn't transfer well to TV (even auto racing appears to be moving at about 70mph vs. the actual 285mph) 'They' didn't do anything about the evolution of the players -getting bigger, stronger, faster- now being able to cover the entire playing surface so well that nobody can get past (center ice trap). Stubbornly refusing to alter rules to allow slick, smaller players to open up it's product. 'They didn't realize that bringing a game to areas below the frost line where youth can't play it, won't catch on. NONE of these clueless concepts have worked, as we have all heard that the majority of owners now affirm that they will lose less money by not playing. This pathetic organization has nothing to do with being from 'the Buff' or loving the Sabres. The verdict of the NHL is in and -in IMO -it must be disbanded and reformed. With a track record of this magnitude, what makes anyone think a salary cap will be the final, one time fix-all? Hockey is a great team game! The NHL is the ultimate witless business entity. Whatever Buffalo NY professional hockey team developes from this abyss, will be my favorite team. Bob
Like A Mofo Posted February 8, 2005 Author Posted February 8, 2005 No cap=no NHL. 231870[/snapback] Both sides just need to find a common ground, slaries need to come down and tickets too, its very simple. And if you all think the NHL must have a salary cap to ensure different teams winning the Cup, competitive balance etc, consider this: Baseball has had 4 different WS Champions without a cap. The NFL, in all its glory and their cap being almost regal to most people, have a team in the Pats that has win 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, and another team in the Eagles that has at least reached the Final 4 four straight seasons: I thought the cap stopped all that? NBA: Didnt the Lakers win 3 in a row and get to another Finals recently?
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 Both sides just need to find a common ground, slaries need to come down and tickets too, its very simple. And if you all think the NHL must have a salary cap to ensure different teams winning the Cup, competitive balance etc, consider this: Baseball has had 4 different WS Champions without a cap. The NFL, in all its glory and their cap being almost regal to most people, have a team in the Pats that has win 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, and another team in the Eagles that has at least reached the Final 4 four straight seasons: I thought the cap stopped all that? NBA: Didnt the Lakers win 3 in a row and get to another Finals recently? What the cap shows is that a lot of times, coaching makes a big deal. So to does having a good core of players. However I'll trade what the cap-sports have versus MLB in terms of possibly not providing for as much open competition , if it means keeping the Bills and Sabres in the black and remaining in Buffalo.
bobblehead Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 Everybody sees things differently. That's what makes the world interesting. I can sit in the best seat in the house in Rochester for a face value price of $19. I paid about 5 times that the last time I was in Colorado - and those were average seats. Ridiculous. 231551[/snapback] Yeah, I was going to say.. $10-15 more for the NHL? Where? I would be all over that! Try $45-50 dollars more, that's more like it.
Like A Mofo Posted February 8, 2005 Author Posted February 8, 2005 Yeah, I was going to say.. $10-15 more for the NHL? Where? I would be all over that! Try $45-50 dollars more, that's more like it. 232095[/snapback] Thats true, but it also depends where you sit
TigerJ Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 I'm to the point where I think the league should reorganize, start from square one, write a fair revenue sharing plan and a salary cap into the league constitution and start hiring players. They would have to drop ticket prices because they would have mostly young players and no stars, but they could rebuild the league and in 5-10 years have a decent product. Screw the union on this one. Let 'em play in Europe.
Recommended Posts